This is why “FBI said so” is not a good argument

[John Iacoletti]

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2015/04/fbis-flawed-forensics-expert-testimony-hair-analysis-bite-marks-fingerprints-arson.html

[John Mytton]

This is why “FBI said so” is not a good argument

Excellent, so no more of these posts!

Oh, one more thing:  is this the same J Edgar who said that the thing he was concerned about "is having something issued so we can convince the public that Oswald is the real assassin"?

Just checking.

JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

False equivalence. Typical “Mytton”.

[John Mytton]

False equivalence. Typical “Mytton”.

Yeah yeah, whatever the FBI says can't be trusted, except when it supports your conspiracy, then you're all ears. Hypocrites, the lot of you!

JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

Yeah yeah, whatever the FBI says can't be trusted, except when it supports your conspiracy, then you're all ears. Hypocrites, the lot of you!

Hoover isn’t the FBI, and his “concerns” aren’t purported, but fallacious forensic evidence.

But nice try.

Hoover did get to decide what he was concerned about, whether you like the implications of it or not. I never said “whatever the FBI says can’t be trusted”, anyway. Typical desperate strawman “Mytton”.

[Thomas Graves]

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2015/04/fbis-flawed-forensics-expert-testimony-hair-analysis-bite-marks-fingerprints-arson.html

Shameful!

Horrifyingly!

--  MWT   

[Richard Smith]

False equivalence is right.  Citing alleged deficiencies in the FBI's use of certain forensics used in other situations decades later (e.g. hair and bites) that was not used in this case to cast fake doubt on Oswald's guilt smacks of a contrarian's utopian fantasy.  Mixing apples and oranges to suggest there is false doubt about the actual evidence.  A dishonest shell game.  Frame all evidence in the context of an impossible standard of proof then squeal that nothing can ever be proven for that reason.  Silly.